Women and children first: Who is most vulnerable in our society?

OPINION:

For generations, when lives have been in danger, in order to prioritize lifesaving operations, the cry “women and children first” has frequently been heard. Perhaps the most memorable application of this notion occurred at the sinking of the Titanic, when women and children were given priority to get into the limited number of lifeboats, resulting in a disproportionate loss of life among the men on board.

The underlying principle has been that, in civilized society, women and children, who are generally acknowledged to be less capable of fending for themselves, need to be taken care of by those who have a greater capacity, primarily by reason of their physical strength, to do so.

With the feminist movement successfully fighting for equal rights for women, there has been a steady erosion of the notion that women need special consideration. Therefore, accompanying this success has been a steady removal of any special status for women.

While this elimination has occurred gradually over the course of decades, nonetheless, until recently, there continued to be an acceptance of the view that women indicate sufficiently significant differences from men to warrant providing them with special status. Thus, for example, women’s-only sports have thrived for decades, giving women the opportunity to develop their physical skills and be recognized as champions in their own athletic contests.

Recently, however, those distinctions have come under fire. Increasingly, elements of the “woke” movement and of the LGBTQ community have argued that distinctions between men and women either do not really exist or are so complex that they cannot be taken into account because they are predicated on the “false” notion that there are only two genders.

Now, the view that young children should be considered among the most vulnerable in our society has also come under threat. Beyond becoming the potential guinea pigs for gender transformation therapies, children have increasingly been deemed to be smaller versions of deliberative adults who are capable of making life-altering decisions even before reaching puberty.

Interestingly, this notion is not entirely new; the Renaissance and post-Renaissance painters often depicted little children and even babies as miniature adults.

In effect, instead of placing women and children first for the purpose of protecting them from harm, we have steadily been placing them first in an effort to suppress distinctions among people. The direct consequence is that neither women nor children are being considered worthy of distinct treatment.

Thus, we find women being forced to compete against genetic men, thereby losing their ability to compete fairly against their genuine peers.

Children, to the extent that they are even allowed to be born in a society where some proclaim that abortions should be performed up until the day of birth, are being subjected to choices they are clearly incapable of making, including permanent, life-altering treatments.

The elimination of the special status of women was dramatically highlighted to me recently when I was informed that a national law firm (whose name I will withhold in order to prevent subjecting it to well-merited embarrassment) had determined that, in celebration of Pride Month, it would host a panel discussion to examine the subject “Navigating the Current Climate of Anti-LGBTQ Legislation.”

The subject is, of course, worthy of exploration. There are arguments to be analyzed and formulated on all sides of the question, from ensuring personal rights to the protection of the young from sexual propaganda.

The startling quality of the proposed panel discussion was the composition of the panel. The seven-person panel at the law firm included two representatives of the American Civil Liberties Union and five drag queens (with one of the ACLU representatives noting that she is a sometimes “drag king”).

It is important to recall that drag queens are men dressing as women and emphasizing, usually in a vulgar manner, the sexual aspects of women (their breasts, clothing, makeup, etc.).

They are performers whose principal task is parodying female appearance and behavior and, it can fairly be argued, demeaning them.

The notion that a major law firm would assemble such a panel to discuss the nuances of any legislation is startling at best. Asking professional drag queens, performers who pretend to be women, who satirically mimic them and thereby caricature their personas, to help shed light on a subject of both complexity and sensitivity is shocking.

It is obviously demeaning to women. It is also demeaning to the legal profession. It seems to me a reflection of the steady erosion of our value system.

As we descend ever more rapidly into the whirlwind of the world of “woke,” some themes are emerging.

Gender distinctions are being blurred, primarily to the detriment of women and children.

Women are being demeaned in so many ways.

Children are being deprived of the right to be children, namely to defer confrontations with the complex and often harsh realities of adult life, such as sexuality.

In effect, childhood is being stripped away from the vulnerable young.

It seems tragic that, when today we urge that women and children go first, we are not doing so in an effort to take them out of harm’s way and to safety. Rather, it is women and children first in the race to denigrate their distinct and special qualities and to deny them the rights and privileges that humane societies have granted them for generations.

Sadly, this leaves our women and children in rough seas without the prospect of a lifeboat as our contemporary social turbulence potentially swallows them up.

• Gerard Leval is a partner in the Washington office of a national law firm. His book, “Lobbying for Equality: Jacques Godard and the Struggle for Jewish Civil Rights During the French Revolution,” was published by HUC Press last year.